Reading Rodski: User Surveys Revisited The 25 th IATUL Annual Conference Krakow 2004 Dr. Grace Saw University of Queensland Cybrary Brisbane, Australia

Overview  Introduction  User Surveys  Rodski Survey  Australia  UQ Cybrary  LibQUAL+  Future Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

The University of Queensland  30,000 students 25% postgraduates 18% international  5,000 staff  7 Faculties, 35 Schools  “Sandstone” University GO8 / Universitas 21 Member Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Why conduct User Surveys?  Identify (unmet) needs  Reveal service issues and opportunities  Ensure efficient use of resources  Provide input for Strategic Planning Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Types of User Surveys  Quantitative surveys  Qualitative surveys  Disciplinary-based studies  Surveys of specific user groups  Automated data analysis Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Rodski in Australia  1997: University of Melbourne  1999: Australasian Universitas 21 Libraries  Universities of Melbourne, Queensland, New South Wales and Auckland  2000: Adopted by Council of Australian University Librarians  Almost all 39 Libraries will undertake Rodski in 2003 / 2004 Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Rodski Survey  Developed by Rodski Research Group  41 – 43 variables  Bivariate methodology Measures Importance and Performance Clients rate each statement twice  Categories  Communication  Facilities and Equipment  Library Staff  Service Delivery  Service Quality  “Gap” areas can be identified Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Rodski at the UQ Cybrary  Conducted 1999, 2001, 2003  3, 500 staff, students and academics surveyed each time  Paper and web versions  Greater levels of satisfaction than dissatisfaction  “Gap” areas targeted for improvement Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

"Excellent firms don't believe in excellence - only in constant improvement and constant change." – Thomas J. Peters Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Top 10 “Gap” Areas 2003 Largest Gap (Service Expectation – Performance) Mean Gap Number of computer workstations is adequate 2.14 Photocopying / printing facilities are adequate 1.97 Computer facilities and electronic equipment are adequate* 1.77 Opening hours meet my needs*1.30 Prompt corrective action is taken regarding missing journals and books 1.30 Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Top 10 “Gap” Areas 2003 Largest Gap (Service Expectation – Performance) Mean Gap Library collection is adequate for my needs1.28 Information resources (books, electronic etc) are easily accessed* 1.13 Library space is adequate0.98 Individual seating is adequate0.97 The Library catalogue provides clear and useful information* 0.85 Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Improving Client Satisfaction Gap AreaResponse Number of Computers  2001: 700 computers replaced  2001 – 2003: 500 new computers Photocopying & Printing  1999 – 2003: continuously upgraded  Aligned to usage patterns Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Improving Client Satisfaction Gap AreaResponse Opening Hours  Increased Hours in 4 branch libraries Space  New Postgraduate Study Facility  Dorothy Hill Research Centre  New Library  Ipswich Library  Planned: Library Refurbishment  Biological Sciences Library Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Improving Client Satisfaction Gap AreaResponse Catalogue & Web Site  2003 – 2004: Substantial user- interface changes  27.8% increase in catalogue usage  (2003 compared to 2002)  2003: 30,000,000 hits to website  30% website use from branch libraries, 30% from other sites within University of Queensland, 40% from outside University. Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

LibQUAL+  ARL/Texas A&M University Partnership  400 libraries  25 questions  4 areas: Effect of Service Personal Control Access to Information Library as Place Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Similarities: Rodski - LibQUAL+  Overall aims  Evaluating quality of service  Enable improvements  Format  Web and paper  Conclusions reached Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Differences: Rodski - LibQUAL+  Types of questions  Benchmarking  Tailored questions  Cost  Rating systems Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

The Future: The Australian Context  CAUL Best Practice Working Group  Current survey of top performing libraries  Aim: Identifying best practice  Comparison between Rodski and LibQUAL+  Possible review of Rodski participation UQ Cybrary  RODSKI in 2005  Longitudinal benefits Introduction User Surveys Rodski Survey LibQUAL+ Future

Thank you Questions